I was on holiday recently and there was some middle-aged woman walking slowly by the pool. She was sporting a black T-shirt that had in white letters “fcuk off” written on it. unfortunately I was a bit of a coward myself avoiding saying to her “why are you telling me to F* Off? I predicted her answer doubtless following on from a smile coupled with a feeling of accomplishment for being able to “correct” someone
and a warm glow because someone was giving her attention.

“Actually it says f,c,u,k – It means French Connection UK”

Fact of the matter is of course is that it was actually saying F* Off. That’s the whole purpose of it, to ‘catch the eye’, to be noticed. It’s what every advertiser dreams of achieving, spending billions of pounds in attempts to do so every single year. It’s really quite incredible that just a word has been able to make millions of pounds. I’ll say it again… A commercial enterprise built on just a word, absolutely amazing.

It is very annoying that people believe they have the right to bring these words into my eye-scan where upon it forces me think of it again… and again, each time strengthening the neural connections in my brain so I’m less likely to forget it.
fcuk relies on the fact that if people like myself get angry or annoyed by it, they have the inbuilt escape clause that it’s not written f*ck but fcuk instead. Yet those who attach themselves to the fcuk brand are doing so because they want to “announce a f*ck” but can draw upon the aforementioned ‘escape clause’. So fcuk wearers are cowards. They want to say f*ck, but don’t have the balls to actually do it. In my eyes, they have stooped to the kind of level that deserves a good spitting on when seen in the street. I’m too polite to do that to do that of course but when I see them, that’s what I’m going to mind-associate to fcuk from now on.

It annoys me yes, very much so, but it’s also quite amusing in a contemptible kind of way, that those who show off fcuk probably thing they are ‘cool’, ‘liberated’, ‘independent’, ‘funny’ and ‘rebellious’ and that’s EXACTLY what fcuk are counting on to sell their stuff. You are being taken for a fcuking ride (as they may say). Mindless consumer trendy plebs.

It’s not a million miles away from going on pilgrimage to Tibet and coming home with a half dozen plastic buddha.

I think I’ll try and summon the energy to actually challenge one of them these days. When I do so I predict they’ll react in the same way I imagine that woman to react – I’m sure they’ll very much downplay cum dismiss it.

Let them dismiss it when I paint on their house “Someone here likes fcuk”

Gilad Atzon says (perhaps quotes) “There is no Jewish conspiracy… everything is done out in the open”

Unless your a regular reader of this quiet spot of the internet (so spooks are included), this video may not have much meaning to you, but it makes me laugh and cry (in reverse order) so this is pretty much a ‘in-friends’ post.

In addition to trampling around the world stealing peoples resources and slaughtering millions of people, The British are also accomplished at kicking up a fuss about nothing, and because the world in their eyes revolves around them, they often say the most amazing of ignorant things.

There’s a case in progress as I type: Regarding Liverpool Football Club player Luis Suarez. Apparently people who know him would not call him a racist(actually I think everyone is racist to a degree – especially if you are really honest about the definition of racism – i.e. treating people differently because of their racial traits, but what I mean is that Suarez (probably) does not believe in or conduct spiteful/hateful/ugly/intimidating racism), but those who don’t know him say he is a racist. Hummm.

Suarez is said to have called the Manchester United player Patrice Evra, ‘negro‘ many times in a football match a few months ago.

Apparently, in Uruguay, the term ‘negro’ is not offensive, but it is (supposed to be) here in the UK, and as we know, the world must conform to white, pretty-hollow-in-sincerity, feel-good British political correctness.

I’m pretty crap with names myself, and I see no reason why Suarez must know Evra’s name to address him by. Is it a compulsion that a footballer must know all the names of all the professional footballers in any particular nation du jour? Remember the frequency of meeting a fellow professional footballer is probably going to be about a usual 180 minutes per year (2 football matches bonding most teams together in a home and away fixture). OK, I guess he could have asked or could have looked at the back of his shirt even!

The BBZ is loving all this racist pantomime. It reports lord Ouseley as saying…

“…all we have heard are denials and denigration of Evra..” – source: h ttp://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/16424487.stm

That’s absolute crap. All we’ve heard about is Suarez’s alleged racism and the manufactured outrage – like Ouseley’s

Ouseley is practically given a soap-box by the BBC and goes on to say:

“…Liverpool’s vitriol has increased.” – Although Ouseley may fantasise Liverpool doing that, they haven’t. Ousely is just talking bollocks!

Going on even more, Ouseley, WHO HAS NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH ANY OF THIS, says

“…This was a dreadful knee-jerk reaction because it stirs things up.”

Ouseley I think, should engage in a wee spot of self-analysis.

–

Windbag Ouseley, having deflated himself, leaves the BBZ on the prowl for some other stirrer to try and keep the anthropogenic storm-in-a-tea-cup on the move. Such behaviour by the BBZ is far from uncommon. Every time the US brews up a ‘terror’ incident, the BBZ wheels out some idiot who takes themselves far too seriously, such as that spine chilling creep Frank Gobeles Gardner – the aptly branded terrorism expert(!) – to say all the ‘right’ things of ‘Al Qaeda hallmarks and sources say this and sources say that…. etc etc etc *yawn*…

The BBZ plummets for Piara Powar. Yeah, Piara Powar. Come on, you know… P i a r a P o w a r.

The BBZ reports Powar as saying:

“Liverpool have constantly undermined the investigation and its outcome,” he told BBC Sport.

The BBZ doesn’t say whether Powar’s view was solicited or that Powar took it upon himself to contact the BBZ, but I have my suspicions as to what went on there.

More bollocks. Liverpool FC did NOT undermine the investigation. It simply showed support for one of it’s employees which it felt (with natural vested interest of course) had not engaged in racism.

“They have been disrespectful to the FA and questioned its integrity and neutrality. “

Yeah, The only reason therefore that the FA have taken NO action against Dalglish or Liverpool FC, is because the cat ate the charge sheet and the only reason Liverpool have decided to challenge the ban & fine…. NOT, but Powar obviously thinks acceptance of the punishment isn’t relevant.

But the BBZ isn’t finished yet, not by a long chalk. It makes a story about the PFA

h ttp://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/16424872.stm

It reports Blackburn striker Jason Roberts (who doubtless like Ouseley and Powar pro-actively contacted the BBC Sport department and weren’t solicited for their views by the BBZ) as saying this…

“If you’re going to come and play in the Premier League and live in our society it’s important that you understand the rules we abide by.”

One remembers BBC Radio legend, Alistair Cooke (RIP) and his “Letter from America” program telling us how the term ‘African-American’ was actually thought of as racist in the US, in Cookes era. With this revelation and an appeal for you to ponder what, in reciprocity, cultural education should be given to European footballers on the naming of African players should they ply their profession in Uruguay, cements perfectly my opening paragraph.

“A totally innocent 18 year old youth on the threshold of a promising life was brutally cut down in the street in front of eye witnesses by a racist thuggish gang,” he told Dobson and Norris.

“You were both members of that gang. I have no doubt at all that you fully subscribed to its views and attitudes.”

He said the assault was “a brief but co-ordinated attack, a racist taunt, a charge and a swallowing up of Stephen Lawrence”.

“I’m sure that you knew one of your group was armed with a knife that night,” the judge said. “The evidence does not prove you had the knife, but the holder had it with your approval.”

Mr Justice Treacy said the encounter was not premeditated but Dobson and Norris had been prepared to attack if the opportunity arose.

The evidence does not prove thy had the knife, but the holder had it with your approval…. So there is no evidence these people killed Stephen Lawrence, yet they are sentenced for murder. That just doesn’t make sense. And the judge cannot assert that the knife wielder did hold it with the approval of Dobson and Norris (although one suspects they probably did).

Given the lack of evidence, shouldn’t Dobson and Norris be standing trial for difference charges other than murder? It matters not that they are probably vile scum, what matters is the law is carried properly.

I can’t believe that Dobson and Norris will have any appeal turned down (unless those considering the appeal act politically).